From our perspective and experience, value-based agreements are part of a solution that allows for greater flexibility for payers and biopharmaceutical companies working together to support the transition to a value-based healthcare system. This is what will keep price transparency in the payer`s mind. Value-based agreements have challenged biopharmaceutical companies to develop innovations based not only on unmet clinical needs, but also on unmet societal needs, including reducing the consumption of healthcare resources that contributes to medical costs and the total cost of care. To meet these requirements, more investment is needed to ensure that new products have profitable results, which is important for payers. It is unlikely that control of high drug prices will disappear anytime soon, as evidenced by the Trump administration`s Master Plan2 and other bureaucratic initiatives2. It is up to the pharmaceutical industry to take control by exploring other market solutions, such as value-based agreements that allow patients to access medicines without crippling them financially. Value-based agreements are still in their infancy and are likely to have even more difficulties in growth. Joint efforts to reach these agreements are nevertheless promising and demonstrate the willingness of health sector stakeholders to pursue innovative approaches to value-based agreements. However, price is not the only criterion for describing value. Other important factors include access, choice, patient experience, price transparency and predictability of premium costs – all key aspects of value-based contract design. For example, while value-based contracts increasingly rely on tight networks to better control unit price and usage management, they must also meet the expectations not only of consumers, but also of regulators for access and network adequacy.
Many of these contracts strive to specify value-based elements, such as guaranteed access outside of working hours, consumer call centres and concierge services, as well as patient portals with transparent data on service price and patient satisfaction. Combine all of this with the way a payer operates by setting premiums through predictable annual expenses, and it becomes easy to see why we`re in the learning phase of value-based contracts. Predictability for a payer is a key part of success, and value-based contracts can be unpredictable. While the transition from service fees to value-based payment will likely continue for some time, healthcare systems, employers, and payers are increasingly engaged in value-based models, developing the necessary infrastructure and actively seeking value-based contracts. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the new Private Sector Healthcare Transformation Task Force recently announced plans to support the rapid expansion of value-based contracts.a As described and described earlier, VSCs require providers and payers to agree on a set of conditions and measures based on clinical circumstances. Patient outcomes and other specific measures of the relevance and effectiveness of the services provided.1 Therefore, the terms negotiated in VBC include measures that include both the quality of the services provided and the price they receive as compensation for the provision of that care. The American College of Surgeons (ACS) pursues extensive and ongoing projects that support surgeons in their efforts to successfully transition to value-based care. What would happen if value-based agreements did not require a contract? Instead, the measured performance would serve as a stated objective, and failure to meet the declared benefit would result in a reversal of the claim.
Expenses would be reimbursed to the patient and expenses incurred by the payer would be reimbursed to the payer. As there is no contract, the program can be implemented publicly and bring benefits to all patients, regardless of their insurance coverage. Bayer`s payer-independent program for larotrectinib has the potential to be an influential example for the rest of the pharmaceutical industry and demonstrates the company`s commitment to the efficacy, safety and value of its drug. Such an agreement could reverberate throughout the pharmaceutical industry and encourage other drug manufacturers to do the same. By addressing some of the value-based contracting challenges identified in the previous section, it is very likely that the number of value-based contracts could grow exponentially. In addition, the nature of health contracts available on the market could change and we could see a higher degree of flexibility on the part of decision-makers, which could improve the health system and massively reduce costs. There is a wide range of value-based procurement challenges that limit implementation in the United States. For example, questions have been raised about how value-based contracts will affect price reporting measures, while there is also uncertainty regarding the federal anti-bribery law and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration`s rules for communications with manufacturers.
Other regulatory issues can be found in Medicaid`s requirement for manufacturers to offer a price equal to the best commercial discount price available. Value-based contracting begins with understanding the assessment of customer value. In the emerging health services and insurance retail market, value equals price, which becomes an important factor in consumer decisions (i.e., purchasing decisions made directly by consumers and not on their behalf by employers, payers or providers). EntrestoTM, a combination of ARB and a novel neprilysin inhibitor for the treatment of chronic heart failure (CI) with reduced ejection fraction, showed such superiority over ACEi enalapril that the pivotal PARADIGMHF study was discontinued prematurely (approximately 5% ARR in CVdeath + HF composite hospitalization and approximately three percent ARR in all-cause mortality). Access gains came slowly, in part because a July launch fell at an unfortunate point in the Medicare D cycle. But payers could also raise questions: What is the benefit of ARB (Gx valsartan)? Is 10 mg an appropriate dose of enalapril for SOC?, would you see fewer hospitalizations without continuity of care in one study? Novartis entered VBC with Aetna, Cigna and Harvard Pilgrim, which linked reductions to the observed frequency of FH hospitalizations. „Competitive drug prices are important, but it`s also important to ensure that customers` medications work as well or better than expected,“ Christopher Bradbury, Cigna`s senior vice president, said in a press release announcing the agreement that will grant EntrestoTM preferred brand status, subject to prior approval of commercial plans. .